@ullarah Can we have an option to turn it on/off at the pod level too?
And let's make sure users can toggle it off on their accounts prefs (I didn't test it π€¦ββοΈ)
@ullarah Can we have an option to turn it on/off at the pod level too?
And let's make sure users can toggle it off on their accounts prefs (I didn't test it π€¦ββοΈ)
@ullarah When you're done upgrading your Fedora desktop, let's have a discussion about this π
@mckinley Don't worry we take community feedback very seriously π€
@ullarah When you're done upgrading your Fedora desktop, let's have a discussion about this π
@mckinley Don't worry we take community feedback very seriously π€
* I mainly use Yarn.social on a mobile device. So the trust for me to click on a URL somebody has posted is low.
* The link verification allows me to check the link before going to it. This cannot be done on a mobile device.
* There are going to be users who decide to masquerade a link as another unfortunately.
* Are people going to just blindly click approve? Of course they are. This has the same protection as βthis link is maliciousβ but people ignore it.
* Link verification gives the pod and the poderator a bit of insurance from blame of bad links users could potentially post.
* Can poderators use this for their own personal tracking? Sure they can, but itβs saying do you trust them to turn off access logs and do you trust them to not recompile Yarn.social to have malicious purposes?
However!
The plan for this feature is to start the implementation of a user based permitted domain list.
Having link verification as a poderator option is totally doable, and will investigate this.
I will also investigate a way to completely remove the need for /linkVerify if a user, or poderator, has it turned off.
If Iβm coming across as argumentative Iβm sorry! Just like @prologic stated we listen to the community. We strive to come to a happy medium.
Thank you for your feedback and hopefully these features wonβt be a deterrent from using Yarn.social.
> If Iβm coming across as argumentative Iβm sorry! Just like @prologic stated we listen to the community. We strive to come to a happy medium.
I didn't think you did at all π And we do take feedback very seriously π That being said, @ullarah's comments and points here are also very valid. If we can come to a compromise, then I think we're fine.
Sadly like everything we've done, it basically means making everything configurable at both the Pod level and User level π Bt that's okay! π
> If Iβm coming across as argumentative Iβm sorry! Just like @prologic stated we listen to the community. We strive to come to a happy medium.
I didn't think you did at all π And we do take feedback very seriously π That being said, @ullarah's comments and points here are also very valid. If we can come to a compromise, then I think we're fine.
Sadly like everything we've done, it basically means making everything configurable at both the Pod level and User level π Bt that's okay! π
Sure, a pod owner could modify
yarnd to track users, but this is has always been a very privacy focused service by default. Privacy focused to the point that it only stores a hash of the user's email address so it's impossible for a pod owner to see it unless the user attempts to recover his account.
> Thank you for your feedback and hopefully these features wonβt be a deterrent from using Yarn.social.
You don't need to talk to me like a customer, let's just have a regular conversation. Your words won't make me leave or stay, and it will take more than a link verification prompt to get me to leave. I like Yarn a lot and I believe in the project. :)
You don't need to talk to me like a customer, let's just have a regular conversation. Your words won't make me leave or stay, and it will take more than a link verification prompt to get me to leave. I like Yarn a lot and I believe in the project. :)